3 ms·
The first google hit (http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.506.777&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.
by vilhelm_s 9y ago
The first google hit (http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.506.777&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.506...) says
> in the period 1991-2001 [...] about 109,000 lives were saved by belts and 8,000 by airbags
so I guess seat belts were a bigger improvement.
- raverbashing 9y agoI guess the question then is: why bother? Also airbags depend on seatbelt use to be effective, and some of them have killed people.
- allannienhuis 9y ago? why bother saving 8,000 lives? In what world is it better to NOT have airbags?
- kss238 9y agoIf the cost of installing airbags could instead be used to install some other safety feature, say aeb in all vehicles, and if that feature saved more lives than airbags do, then it would be better to not have airbags.
- raverbashing 9y agoWhile 8k is a substantial value, other technologies might be more effective, less costly and possible safer. Remember the takata airbag defect killed 15 people in the US. https://www.consumerreports.org/car-recalls-defects/takata-airbag-recall-everything-you-need-to-know/ https://www.consumerreports.org/car-recalls-defects/takata-a...
- andygates 9y ago8000 vs 15, and that's not a problem with airbags, it's a problem with defective industrial components and corporate nonsense.